|
Article Excerpt
Recently, a new concept, work-family culture, has been introduced in the work-family literature (e.g. Campbell Clark, 2001; Kinnunen, Mauno, Geurts, & Dikkers, 2005; Lewis, 2000; Lewis & Smithson, 2001; Thompson, Beuvais, & Lyness, 1999). Generally, work-family culture refers to an organization's supportiveness or responsiveness towards employees' family-related needs. It has also been recognized that a supportive work-family culture is associated with several positive well-being outcomes (see Kinnunen et al, 2005, for a review). However, the mechanism that explains these positive relationships remains unclear. Specifically, the issue that needs further clarification is whether the relationship between a supportive work-family culture and well-being is direct or mediated by other factors. In the present study, we aimed to shed further light on this issue.
On the basis of previous (mainly theoretical) work (Kinnunen et al., 2005; Lewis, 2000; Lewis & Smithson, 2001), the basis of the above-mentioned mechanism is as follows: where a non-supportive work-family culture exists, employees may not feel entitled to use the work-family arrangements that are available to them (see Lewis & Smithson, 2001) and thus may not make full use of them. In fact, studies also provide some empirical evidence that a supportive family-work culture increases the uptake of work-family benefits, for example, flexitime arrangements, part-time work, a compressed working week, and family care leave (see Allen, 2001; Dikkers, Den Dulk, Geurts, & Piper, 2005; Haas, Allard, & Hwang, 2002; Thompson et al., 1999). However, the view that the uptake of work-family arrangements leads to a lower level of work-family conflict, and thus to a better level of well-being, is mainly based on theoretical reasoning. That is, if employees do not feel entitled to take advantage of existing work-family arrangements, then they may encounter even more problems in balancing the demands of work and family and experience a decreased level of well-being (e.g. Lewis & Smithson, 2001). Therefore, there are at least two potential mediators--the use of work-family arrangements and the perceived work-family conflict--which may explain the positive outcomes of a supportive work-family culture on well-being.
Of the two potential mediators, we focused on perceived work-family conflict in the present study. The reasons for this are twofold. First, despite its apparent theoretical soundness, work-family conflict has received little empirical attention as a potential mediator between work-family culture and well-being. Indeed, it has recently been proposed that perceived work-family conflict is potentially an even more important mediator variable than objective factors such as the availability of work-family arrangements (see Eby, Casper, Lockwood, Bourdeaux, & Brinley, 2005). Second, there are country-specific factors that play an important role in this issue. In Finland, many work-family arrangements have statutory force (day-care and other care services for those who need them, paid parental leave, maternity and paternity leave, leave for the care of a sick child, leave for the care of young children), or are based on other official agreements (there is a wide array of working time arrangements, including flexible working hours). Hence, their uptake might not be as dependent on the prevailing organizational work-family culture as in many other countries. On the contrary, in this specific context, work-family conflict as perceived by individual employees is likely to assume greater importance.
In the present study, we investigated whether perceived work-family conflict would operate as a mediating factor between work-family culture perceptions and self-reported distress. Furthermore, our multiorganizational data (N = 1,297) enabled us to study simultaneously whether the relationships were equivalent across five Finnish organizations (i.e. the social and health care department, education department, labour department, paper mill, and IT company). In our model, in which testing was performed using structural equation modelling (SEM), the hilly mediating model was taken as the starting-point (see Fig. 1).
Direct relationship between work-family culture and well-being
Recently, Thompson et al. (1999) defined work-family culture as 'the shared assumptions, beliefs and values regarding to the extent to which an organization supports and values the integration of employees' work and family lives' (p. 349). Central to work-family culture is the construct of supportiveness, which generally refers to the extent that an organization (or work unit/department) is perceived to be family-supportive by its personnel (e.g. Allen, 2001; Dikkers etal., 2005; Haas et al., 2002; Kinnunen et al., 2005). For example, Allen discusses family-supportive organization perceptions (FSOP), which include the organization's supportiveness toward the demands of its employees' families.
In examining the links between work-family culture and well-being outcomes, the theoretical assumption is that a supportive work-family culture should make an organization a more pleasant place to work in. This, in turn, should affect an employee's work experiences, including work-family interface, positively (see Allen, 2001; Behson, 2002; Casper & Buffardi, 2004). A supportive organizational culture should signal to employees that the organization is willing to look after the well-being of its personnel (e.g. Cameron & Quinn, 1999; Goodman, Zammuto, & Gifford, 2001). The theoretical basis for the above argumentation can be found from perceived organizational support theory (i.e. POS theory; Eisenberger, Huntington, Hutchison, & Sowa, 1986; Rhoades & Eisenberger, 2002). According to the POS theory, an organization that values the well-being of its employees by showing concern for their needs, goals, and personal problems, also promotes the well-being and health of its personnel.
Indeed, previous empirical studies confirm that a supportive work-family culture is associated with several positive outcomes. For example, it has been found that when the personnel perceives an organization's culture as family supportive, they report a lower level of psychological distress (Kossek, Colquitt, & Noe, 2001; Mauno, Kinnunen, & Piitulainen, 2005). Regarding work attitudes, it has been indicated that supportive work-family culture fosters job satisfaction (Allen, 2001; Behson, 2002; Mauno et al., 2005) and organizational commitment (Dikkers et al., 2005; Lyness, Thompson, Francesco, &Judiesch, 1999; Thompson et al., 1999). In sum, there is a strong theoretical and empirical basis for a positive association between supportive work-family culture and employee well-being. Therefore, we hypothesized that as a specific form of organizational support, a family-supportive organizational culture (i.e. work-family culture) would relate positively to the self-reported well-being of employees.
Mediating role of work-family conflict
The empirical evidence obtained on the potential mediating role of work-family conflict in the link between work-family culture and employee well-being has mostly been indirect. First, it has been shown that a family supportive organizational culture is linked to a low level of work-family conflict (Dikkers et al., 2005; Mauno et al., 2005; Thompson et al., 1999). Second, there are also research findings suggesting that work-related social support, which is conceptually similar to the concept of supportive work-family culture, operates as an antecedent to work-family conflict (Carlson & Perrewe, 1999; Warren &Johnson, 1995). Third, there is a lot of evidence to show that work-family conflict is linked to various indicators of diminished individual well-being (see Allen, Herst, Bruck, & Sutton, 2000, for a review). This evidence, together with the aforementioned support for a direct relationship between supportive work-family culture and employee well-being, points to the possibility of mediation.
In this respect, a recent Dutch study provides some preliminary findings, showing that work-family conflict partially mediated the association between a supportive work-family culture and job satisfaction (Peeters, Montgomery, & Schaufeli, 2003). Furthermore, Thomas and Ganster (1995) have previously found that supervisor support--as one of the most important determinants of a supportive work-family culture--reduced work-family conflict, which, in turn, was associated with increased job satisfaction and decreased depression and somatic complaints. Moreover, Snow, Swan, Raghavan, Connell, and Klein (2003) recently indicated that a lack of work-related social support (including low supervisor support) increased work-family conflict, which, in turn, resulted in increased psychosomatic symptoms (anxiety, depression, somatic complaints). Taken together, these studies provide empirical evidence that work-family conflict may function as a mediating factor between work- or organizationrelated support (defined and measured in our study through work-family culture) and employee well-being.
At the theoretical level, the mediator model developed by Frone et al. (1992, 1997), which states that perceived work-family conflict operates as a mediating mechanism between work and family demands and employee well-being in different domains of life, leads us to a similar conclusion. That is, a non-responsive work-family culture may also be viewed as an organizational demand or constraint, which starts by exacerbating perceived work-family conflict, and then negatively spills over into lower self-reported well-being in different domains of life. Consequently, considering both empirical and theoretical viewpoints, our second hypothesis was that the positive link between supportive work-family culture and self-reported well-being would disappear when perceived work-family conflict is taken into account. This highlights that the relationship between work-family culture and experienced well-being is mediated by perceived work-family conflict.
However, the previous studies in which the mediating role of work-family conflict in the relationship between work-family culture and employee well-being has been examined have certain limitations. For example, in the study of Peeters and associates (2003), outcome variables consisted solely of job attitudes, whereas in the study conducted by Thomas and Ganster (1995), work-family culture was measured unidimensionally, that is, through supervisor support (see also Snow et al., 2003). Our study extends this research by focusing on outcome variables other than job attitudes (i.e. self-reported distress) and by conceptualizing work-family culture more broadly (i.e. multidimensionally). Furthermore, our study is based on five diverse organizational samples, thus enhancing the generalizability of our findings. Taken together, our study clearly contributes to the previous literature and research....
|
